DOCSLIB.ORG

Maquetación 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Maquetación 1 article 137. 12/2016 EU and Turkey at a Crossroads: Avoiding a Foreseeable Break-Up Euro-Mediterranean Policies. European Institute of the Mediterranean (IEMed) Introduction On 24 November 2016, the European Parliament (EP) passed a non-binding resolution calling for a temporary freeze of the membership negotiations with Turkey, twelve years after giving its green light to the opening of the accession talks. According to European lawmakers, temporarily suspending the accession negotiations would be the logical consequence of the “disproportionate repressive measures” taken by the Turkish government since the failed military coup attempt, which have further undermined the rule of law and fundamental freedoms. The EU keeps repeating to the Turkish leadership that the repression, which has been targeting many sectors of Turkish society, including media and deputies from the opposition, weakens the rule of law and fundamental freedoms, while the leadership has systematically dismissed European critics and accused the Union of applying double standards to the country. Beyond the EU-Turkey dispute following the post-coup repression, the predicament in which the relationship currently finds itself is the product of a much longer process discussed by this policy brief. The issue of Turkey’s membership of the Union has been at the centre of the relationship. However, the stalled accession negotiations opened in 2005 have fuelled distrust and resentments on both sides. After fifty years of waiting to enter the EU, some signs show that Ankara has chosen to move away from the Union and its values. Meanwhile, the 28-state block remains committed to keeping Turkey anchored to the Union, be it for strategic reasons or more pragmatic considerations, including preserving the migrant deal signed with Ankara. As the membership process has lost its credibility, with neither side honestly believing in Turkey’s accession anymore, this may be the moment for the EU to redefine its relationship with Turkey in order to regain leverage. Among the options at the EU’s disposal, reengaging with Turkey on the economic level, a field where the EU’s soft power may not have disappeared, would be worth exploring. The Long Journey towards Membership Negotiations Turkey’s first bid to embark on the European integration project dates back a few years following the creation of the European Economic Community (EEC) in 1957. After applying as associate member to the EEC in 1959, the country signed an Associate Agreement with 1 the Community (1963) with the aim of progressively establishing a Customs Union. The article country’s journey towards the EEC continued through the 1980s with the formal application for full membership (1987), but eventually came to a halt with the decision by the Commission of the European Communities to reject it. The EEC argued at the time that it was inappropriate to launch new accession negotiations, stressing Turkey’s democratic and economic shortfalls. However, while acknowledging Turkey’s “general opening towards Europe” and its “strategically important geopolitical position,” the Commission expressed its willingness to pursue its cooperation with Ankara, announcing the completion of the Customs Union for 1995 (Commission of the European Communities, 1989). This objective was met in due time, granting Ankara access to the EU internal market with exceptions, notably including agricultural, coal and steel products. Turkey pursued its long march towards the accession in the following years, successively being recognised as eligible for membership (European Council of Luxembourg, 1997) and finally as a candidate country (European Council, Helsinki, 1999). On 11 March 2003, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, leader of the Justice and Development Party (AKP) became the new Prime Minister of the Republic of Turkey. The new strong man of Turkey would play an important role in giving a new impetus towards the EU. The former mayor of Istanbul (1994-1998) had realised that Turkish Islamists had to change their strategy to win the elections and remain in power. Indeed, the Constitutional Court and the military systematically had thwarted their claims to power. In 1997, Erdoğan’s mentor, Necmettin Erbakan, was forced by a “post- modern” coup to step down as Prime Minister. Moving away from Erbakan, Erdoğan founded his own party, the AKP, which adopted a pro-European stance. He believed that the EU would enable the AKP to gain legitimacy and implement its domestic political agenda. His assumptions were that the democratic reforms required to become an EU member would help eliminate the greatest concern of the Islamists, the army’s political interventionism. The structural economic reforms required to enter the Union would also give a framework to revive the Turkish economy. Ensuring the economic recovery of Turkey would, in turn, help ensure the AKP great popularity. Additionally, liberal and democratic requisites, especially regarding religious freedom, would also help ease secular restrictions on public manifestations of Islam, such as the veil ban in universities. Moreover, embracing European values could hardly be met by the opposition of secular and liberal segments of the society. The AKP’s political line and reforms to meet the EU criteria was, in turn, welcomed by many Europeans. Some saw the opportunity to demonstrate that Europe was willing to open itself to a Muslim-majority country as well as to spread the message of the compatibility of Islam and democracy, especially in the aftermath of 9/11. Thus, in December 2004, EU leaders decided to open accession negotiations with Turkey, 46 years after Ankara’s first application for associate membership to the EEC, 18 years after submitting its formal application to full membership, and six years after being granted the status of candidate country. Losing Faith (2005-2013) Immediately after the opening of the negotiations, however, it appeared that Turkey’s path 2 towards membership would be full of pitfalls. While Turkish support for membership amounted article to 62% of the population in October-November 2004 (European Commission, 2004), a popular rejection of Europe’s enlargement towards Turkey could be easily perceived from the polls. According to Eurobarometer, 64.55% of Europeans were opposed to Turkey’s membership, against 31% in favour (European Commission, 2005b). The same survey showed that issues such as migration and cultural differences were the primary reasons for this opposition. European politicians have often played with these issues to thwart the European project or to attract votes in national elections. The recent Brexit campaign’s use of the Turkish scarecrow to attract support for the “no” vote was not a novelty. Even a few months before the decision of the European Council to open negotiations in 2004, it featured high among the arguments used by opponents to the “European Constitution”. Austrian, French and German leaders made no secret of their opposition to Turkey’s accession. On many occasions, Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy suggested that Turkey should be offered a “privileged partnership” instead of full membership, triggering angry reactions from Ankara. The French President also claimed that if Turkey were to successfully complete the negotiations, he would put the Turkish issue to a referendum (Hürriyet Daily News, 2008). His initiative to create a Union for the Mediterranean was also perceived by the Turkish side as a way to divert it from the EU membership path. The Cyprus problem was obviously another serious pitfall on Turkey’s road towards membership. Since the Turkish military intervention in 1974, Ankara has never recognised the Republic of Cyprus, an EU member state since May 2004. Before opening the negotiations, the European Council required its agreements with Turkey to be extended to the new EU member states, including Cyprus. By a compromise, Turkey signed additional protocols while specifying that they would not amount to recognition of the Republic of Cyprus (Euractiv, 2016a). EU leaders finally agreed to adopt a Negotiating Framework clearly outlining that Turkey’s progress will also be measured on its support for a comprehensive settlement and the normalisation of bilateral relations with all member states (European Commission, 2005a). Nevertheless, the issue would remain a major hurdle for the success of the process. While formal negotiations between Ankara and Brussels began in 2006, they were almost immediately stalled. Indeed, on 11 December 2006, eight out of the 35 negotiating chapters were blocked by the European Council to sanction the Turkish refusal to implement the Ankara Agreement to the Republic of Cyprus. While no progress towards the resolution of the Cyprus problem was made in the following years, the path of the reforms in Turkey started to slowdown. Additional chapters were opened but Ankara suffered another blow in 2007. France decided to block the opening of five chapters that would have made Turkish membership inevitable. Furthermore, in 2009, the Republic of Cyprus vetoed six additional chapters, including no. 23 on Judiciary and Fundamental Rights and no. 24 on Justice, Freedom and Security, decisive to address Turkish democratic shortfalls. In total, after 11 years of negotiations, one chapter has been closed, 15 are open and 16 remain blocked. Despite attempts to reinvigorate the talks based on mutual interests, the Cyprus issue, the opposition of some member states for political and cultural reasons, as well as the limited 3 progress made by Turkey on key issues immersed the negotiations into lethargy. article For the Turks, the prospect of seeing their country joining the European Union was vanishing. The political opposition manifested by several EU countries convinced large segments of Turkish society that their country was facing double standards. Turkish Chief Negotiator Egemen Ba ı publicly admitted that even if the membership remained his country’s objective, it may never be reached because of “stiff opposition and prejudices” by EU members (Hürriyet Daily News, 2013b). Again, the polls revealed a considerable loss of support for the membership along the years (see graph).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • EU Commission Presidency Candidates: Taxation Will Remain High up on EU’S Agenda
    BRUSSELS I 6 MAY 2019 EU Commission Presidency Candidates: Taxation Will Remain High Up on EU’s Agenda In the run up to the EU elections, Politico Europe, Maastricht University and the European Youth Forum organised the Maastricht debate between the likely candidates for the post of EU Commission president. The debate was particularly aiming to target students and young Europeans, and in addition to digitalisation, climate change and sustainability, taxation was among the topics that raised interest and debate. Bas Eickhout (Netherlands, The Greens), Jan Zahradil (Czech Republic, Alliance of Conservatives and Reformists in Europe), Frans Timmermans (The Netherlands, Socialists & Democrats), Guy Verhofstadt (Belgium, Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe) and Violeta Tomić (Slovenia, Party of the European Left) met in Maastricht, with the notable absence of the Conservative frontrunner, Manfred Weber (Germany, European People’s Party) who chose to attend instead a Munich event celebrating the 80th birthday of Theo Waigel, a former German finance minister. Weber did attend another debate in Florence subsequently, where much of the discussions were revolving around the collective security and the need for a separate European army. All candidates at the Maastricht debate expressed their support for more regulation of the American tech companies operating in the Single Market as a matter of priority. Considering the public interest in the regulatory and enforcement powers of the European Commission vis-a-vis these businesses, it is likely that many related policy areas such as taxation, copyright and data protection will continue to be high-up on the next Commission’s agenda. With great power more responsibility should have come, apparently.
    [Show full text]
  • Europe's Two-Faced Authoritarian Right FINAL.Pdf
    1 Europe’s two-faced authoritarian right: ‘anti-elite’ parties serving big business interests 15 May 2019 INTRODUCTION If the more pessimistic projections are to be believed, authoritarian right-wing politicians will do well in the upcoming European Parliament elections, reflecting a surge in EU scepticism and disillusionment with establishment parties, many of whom have overseen a decade or more of punishing austerity. These authoritarian right parties are harnessing this disillusionment using the rhetoric of ending corruption, tackling ‘elite’ interests, regaining ‘national’ dignity and identity, and defending the rights of ‘ordinary people’. However, the contrast between this rhetoric and their actual actions is stark. From repressive laws to dark money funding; from corruption scandals to personal enrichment; from corporate deregulation to enabling tax avoidance, the defence of ‘elite’ interests disguised as the defence of disaffected classes is a defining characteristic of Europe’s rising authoritarian right parties. After the election, Europe could well see the formation of a new axis by these parties across the EU institutions, simultaneously becoming a significant force in the European Parliament, while having a strong voice in the Council and European Council, and nominating like-minded commissioners to the EU’s executive. Such an alliance could undermine or prevent action to tackle some of the most pressing issues facing us such as climate change, whilst working against workers’ rights, and measures to regulate and tax business
    [Show full text]
  • The European Union: Questions and Answers
    The European Union: Questions and Answers Updated October 27, 2020 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov RS21372 SUMMARY RS21372 The European Union: Questions and Answers October 27, 2020 The European Union (EU) is a political and economic partnership that represents a unique form of cooperation among sovereign countries. The EU is the latest stage in a process of integration Kristin Archick begun after World War II, initially by six Western European countries, to foster interdependence Specialist in European and make another war in Europe unthinkable. The EU currently consists of 27 member states, Affairs including most of the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, and has helped to promote peace, stability, and economic prosperity throughout the European continent. How the EU Works The EU has been built through a series of binding treaties. Over the years, EU member states have sought to harmonize laws and adopt common policies on an increasing number of economic, social, and political issues. EU member states share a customs union; a single market in which capital, goods, services, and people move freely; a common trade policy; and a common agricultural policy. Nineteen EU member states use a common currency (the euro), and 22 member states participate in the Schengen area of free movement in which internal border controls have been eliminated. In addition, the EU has been developing a Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), which includes a Common Security and Defense Policy (CSDP), and pursuing cooperation in the area of Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) to forge common internal security measures. Member states work together through several EU institutions to set policy and to promote their collective interests.
    [Show full text]
  • Covid 19 Angle’
    STUDY Studies with a ‘Covid 19 angle’ Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs Directorate-General for Internal Policies PE 694.625 - June 2021 EN Studies with a ‘Covid 19 angle’ Abstract When the pandemic loomed over us in spring 2020, we asked experts to analyze whether it was possible to introduce a Covid angle into their studies. In many cases, it seemed prima facie a bit far-fetched. However, it soon became apparent that even in our area of work there were interesting aspects to investigate. This publication groups together the most relevant parts of the studies published so far and in which a Covid 19 angle has been presented and discussed. AUTHORS ADMINISTRATOR RESPONSIBLE Miguel TELL CREMADES EDITORIAL ASSISTANT Sofia PAPADOPOULOU LINGUISTIC VERSION Original: EN ABOUT THE EDITOR Policy departments provide in-house and external expertise to support EP committees and other parliamentary bodies in shaping legislation and exercising democratic scrutiny over EU internal policies. To contact the Policy Department or to subscribe for updates, please write to: Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs European Parliament B-1047 Brussels Email: [email protected] Manuscript completed in June 2021 © European Union, 2021 This document is available on the internet at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/supporting-analyses DISCLAIMER AND COPYRIGHT The opinions expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the European Parliament. Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorised, provided the source is acknowledged and the European Parliament is given prior notice and sent a copy.
    [Show full text]
  • The European Union: Current Challenges and Future Prospects
    The European Union: Current Challenges and Future Prospects Updated February 27, 2017 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R44249 The European Union: Current Challenges and Future Prospects Summary The European Union (EU) is a unique partnership in which member states have pooled sovereignty in certain policy areas and harmonized laws on a wide range of economic and political issues. The EU is the latest stage in a process of European integration begun after World War II, initially by six Western European countries, to promote peace, security, and economic development. The EU currently consists of 28 member states, including the formerly communist countries of Central and Eastern Europe. EU members share a customs union; a single market in which goods, services, people, and capital move freely (known as the “four freedoms”); a common trade policy; a common agricultural policy; and a common currency (the euro), which is used by 19 member states (collectively referred to as the “eurozone”). Twenty-two EU members participate in the Schengen area of free movement, in which individuals may travel without passport checks. In addition, the EU has taken steps to develop common foreign and security policies, has sought to build common internal security measures, and remains committed to enlargement, especially to the countries of the Western Balkans. The EU is largely viewed as a cornerstone of European stability and prosperity. Currently, however, the EU faces a range of political and economic pressures, including slow growth and persistently high unemployment in many EU countries, as well as the rise of populist political parties, at least some of which harbor anti-EU or “euroskeptic” sentiments.
    [Show full text]
  • SPRING 2021 ACTIVITIES January 2021 February 2021
    SPRING 2021 ACTIVITIES January 2021 February 2021 ● Tuesday, Jan. 26 | 1:00 pm - 2:00 pm Thursday, Feb. 4 | 12:00 pm—1:00 pm EDT Jean Monnet in the US Webinar Jean Monnet in the US Webinar The European Union and Youth Employment Update on Brexit Birgit Daiber, Member of the European Parliament (MEP) Anand Menon, Prof. of European Politics and Foreign Affairs, King's College London ● Tuesday, Jan. 26 | 2:00 pm - 3:00 pm Jean Monnet in the US Webinar Wednesday, Feb. 10 | 3:00 pm—4:00 pm EDT The United Kingdom’s Foreign Policy in Post-Brexit World Jean Monnet in the US Webinar , UK Ambassador to the United States Karen Pierce Anti-Gender Politics and Rightwing Populism in Poland Elżbieta Korolczuk, Associate professor in sociology ● Wednesday, Jan. 27, 2021 | 12:00 pm - 1:30 pm Södertörn University in Stockholm and American Studies Center, Warsaw University Jean Monnet in the US Webinar Transatlantic Relations After the Trump Administration H.E. Federica Mogherini, High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs & Security Policy ● Thursday, Feb. 18 | 12:00 pm - 1:30 pm (2014-2019), and Rector, College of Europe Conversations on Europe | Virtual Creating Europe Through the Built Environment Thursday, Jan. 28 | 10:00 am—11:15 am Jean Monnet in the US Webinar Tuesday, Feb. 23| 10:30 am—11:30 am Reinventing Leadership in the Transatlantic Relationship Jean Monnet in the US Webinar H.E. Federica Mogherini, High Representative of the The EU Policy on Digitization (of Art Collections) European Union for Foreign Affairs & Security Policy (2014-2019), and Rector, College of Europe Tuesday, Feb.
    [Show full text]
  • Showing True Illiberal Colours – Rule of Law Vs Orbán’S Pandemic Politics Petra Bárd and Sergio Carrera
    No 2020-10 / April 2020 Showing true illiberal colours – Rule of law vs Orbán’s pandemic politics Petra Bárd and Sergio Carrera Abstract This Policy Insight examines the Hungarian government’s responses to the coronavirus pandemic and their impacts on the rule of law. It argues that the pandemic does not create autocracies, but it shows more clearly their true illiberal colours. The paper assesses the scope of the so-called ‘Enabling Act’ granting the government the power to rule by decree and its damaging implications for the effective democratic control of executive actions and other checks and balances such as media pluralism and freedom of association. The analysis argues that the Hungarian government is unequivocally violating the EU founding principles enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union and its current pandemic politics are making this ever more transparent. The paper recommends more EU centralisation and interinstitutional cooperation in the assessment and scrutiny of all member states’ compliance with the trinity of the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights. It concretely suggests first, the timely enforcement of EU standards by the European Commission and the Luxembourg Court through rule of law infringement proceedings, and second, the adoption of an interinstitutional EU Periodic Review (EUPR) on the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights. Petra Bárd is Associate Professor at ELTE School of Law and Visiting Professor at the Central European University in Budapest and Vienna. Sergio Carrera is Senior Research Fellow and Head of the Justice and Home Affairs Programme at CEPS, a Part-Time Professor at the European University Institute (Migration Policy Centre) and a Visiting Professor at PSIA (Sciences Po).
    [Show full text]
  • The European Union: Integration, Politics & Policy
    The European Union: Integration, Politics & Policy Dr Dionyssis G. Dimitrakopoulos [email protected] This module is offered under the auspices of the Jean Monnet Chair in Parliamentary Democracy and European Integration which is co-funded by the European Union under its Erasmus+ programme Birkbeck College, University of London 2020-21 academic year This version of the coursebook reflects the exigencies of compliance with accessibility requirements. An alternative is available from the course tutor. Contents Introduction 4 Module Aims and Objectives 4 Background Reading 4 Moodle 4 Module Syllabus 5 Reading List 6 Part I: Historical and Theoretical Perspectives 6 5 October 2020 6 5 October 2020 7 12 October 2020 7 Part II: Institutions and the EU Policy Process 10 19 October 2020 10 26 October 2020 11 2 November 2020 12 Workshop week I: part a) Monday 16 November 2020 14 23 November 2020 14 Workshop week I: part b) Saturday 28 November 2020 18 30 Nov. 2020 18 7 Dec. 2020 21 14 Dec. 2020 22 11 January 2021 23 Part III: EU Policy-Making 25 18 Jan. 2021 25 25 Jan. 2021 25 1 February 2021 26 8 Feb. 2021 27 Saturday school: 13 February 2021 29 Workshop Week II 30 1 March 2021 30 8 March 2021 33 15 March 2021 34 22 March 2021 34 Assessment 36 Essay 36 Coursework Submission 36 Coursework Feedback and Results 36 Late Submission and Mitigating Circumstances 37 Exams 37 Seminar mark 38 Essay Questions 38 Reading Week and Workshop Week 41 Reading Week 41 Workshop Week 41 Learning Resources, Academic Support and Student Feedback 42 Attendance
    [Show full text]
  • Brussels Playbook
    26.9.2016 POLITICO ­ Brussels Playbook About Cookies: POLITICO uses cookies to personalize and improve your reader experience. × By using our website or by closing this message box, your agree to our use of cookies as described in our cookie policy. POLITICO Brussels Playbook Ryan Heath's must-read briefing on what's driving the day in Brussels. POLITICO Brussels Playbook, presented by Aviva: Vestager’s European front — Berlin election fall-out By RYAN HEATH | 9/20/16, 7:10 AM CET | Updated 9/20/16, 5:15 PM CET By Ryan Heath | Tips to [email protected] | If you prefer to read this on your desktop click here If you enjoy reading Brussels Playbook, please share it with your colleagues and friends. TTIP protests today in EU quarter: From 4:30 p.m. until around 7 p.m. The demonstrators will come down Rue de la Loi and pass around the back of the European Council. THE EX-FILES … WHICH EUROPEAN FORMER PRIME MINISTER … Used Gmail to conduct work business because they didn’t trust their own government’s email security, according to Playbook’s source. WHICH FORMER COMMISSION PRESIDENT … Was seen by Playbook’s source thrusting his business card into the hands of Uber CEO Travis Kalanick at the 2016 World Economic Forum in Davos. We hear he was pressing the point about how good his advice is. **A message from Aviva: Aviva’s #Moneytalks toolkit — Tool #8: When you buy a washing machine, it has a sticker for how energy efficient it is. But when you start saving, do you know where the money goes? The EU should create a responsible toolkit http://www.politico.eu/newsletter/playbook/politico­brussels­playbook­presented­by­aviva­vestagers­european­front­berlin­election­fall­out/ 1/8 26.9.2016 POLITICO ­ Brussels Playbook investment seal of approval.
    [Show full text]
  • Constitutional Pluralism After Brexit', Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies, Vol
    Edinburgh Research Explorer Back to a sovereign future? Citation for published version: Mac Amhlaigh, C 2019, 'Back to a sovereign future? Constitutional pluralism after Brexit', Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies, vol. 21, pp. 41-58. https://doi.org/10.1017/cel.2019.8 Digital Object Identifier (DOI): 10.1017/cel.2019.8 Link: Link to publication record in Edinburgh Research Explorer Document Version: Peer reviewed version Published In: Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies Publisher Rights Statement: This article has been published in a revised form in the Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies, https://doi.org/10.1017/cel.2019.8 . This version is published under a Creative Commons CC-BY-NC-ND. No commercial re-distribution or re-use allowed. Derivative works cannot be distributed. © Cambridge University Press 2019. General rights Copyright for the publications made accessible via the Edinburgh Research Explorer is retained by the author(s) and / or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing these publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Take down policy The University of Edinburgh has made every reasonable effort to ensure that Edinburgh Research Explorer content complies with UK legislation. If you believe that the public display of this file breaches copyright please contact [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 27. Sep. 2021 Back to a Sovereign Future?: Constitutional Pluralism After Brexit Cormac Mac Amhlaigh (University of Edinburgh) Word count 7714 (10, 273 inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Polish Duda Rises Over Brussels the Election of a Euroskeptical President Raises Pressing Questions About Warsaw’S Sway in the EU
    VOL. 1 NO. 6 THURSDAY, MAY 28, 2015 POLITICO.EU Polish Duda rises over Brussels The election of a Euroskeptical president raises pressing questions about Warsaw’s sway in the EU By JAN CIENSKI factored in a second term for in- of a more socially conservative — into parliamentary elections Warsaw as the leading EU power cumbent Bronisław Komorows- and Euroskeptical strand of Pol- in autumn. Komorowski’s loss east of Germany. The surprise victory of Andrzej ki. Dismissed as an unknown and ish politics. reflected voter fatigue with his “Duda is a representative of Duda in Poland’s presidential long-shot, Duda triumphed in The 43-year-old lawyer comes centrist Civic Platform (PO), the Kaczyński movement, which runo was greeted with shock Sunday’s elections by three per- from the Law and Justice (PiS) which has ruled Poland since was very critical of the common in Brussels, and raised pressing centage points, bloc of Jarosław Kaczyński, a 2007 and comes into the election European approach and has a questions about the future of heralding former prime minister who campaign on a weaker foot. This very nationalistic background,” Warsaw’s policies toward as well the re- will lead the party — now unexpected political shift is also said Manfred Weber, president as influence in the EU. sur- brimming with momen- forcing a rethink of Poland by its The European capital had long gence tum and confidence main EU partners, which view POLAND: PAGE 21 The reign The Queen in Spain is does CREDIT no longer Cameron’s on the wane bidding King Felipe and By BEN JUDAH Queen Letizia, LONDON — Queen Elizabeth II made clear Wednesday that the a power parliament will be dominated by Prime Minister David Cameron’s couple for a quest for a new, long-term consti- tutional settlement for Britain.
    [Show full text]
  • Whoever Wins Istanbul Wins Turkey” How a Mayoral Race Has Precipitated a National Crisis a Conversation with Howard Eissenstat
    Q&A “Whoever Wins Istanbul Wins Turkey” How a Mayoral Race Has Precipitated a National Crisis A Conversation with Howard Eissenstat June 2019 On March 31, Turkish citizens nationwide elected more than a thousand municipal and district mayors, as well as municipal council members, neighborhood heads, and other local officials.1 More than 57 million voters participated, representing a turnout of nearly 85 percent (typical of Turkey, where voting is both required and a widely accepted civic duty).2 Although President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s ruling AK Party (AKP), in coalition with the right-wing Nationalist Action Party (MHP), won the majority of local races, it lost the mayorships in Ankara, Izmir, and Istanbul to the main opposition, the secularist Republican People’s Party (CHP). In the most important contest, the CHP’s Ekrem İmamoğlu was elected Istanbul’s new mayor by a margin of less than 1 percent, ousting the AKP from a key office that it had controlled for more than 25 years. But on May 6, the Supreme Election Council (YSK) effectively annulled his election, citing unspecified irregularities, and ordered a new vote to be held on June 23. The YSK’s ruling, widely seen as having been made under AKP pressure, is unprecedented. The loss of Istanbul was a bitter pill for the AKP—and, so far at least, one that Erdoğan has refused to swallow. POMED Nonresident Senior Fellow Howard Eissenstat explains how İmamoğlu won on March 31, whether he can do so again on June 23, and why this election holds tremendous importance not only for Turkey’s greatest city but for the country as a whole.
    [Show full text]